Not as clear cut as one would think.
http://freakonomics.com/2012/12/21/is-changing-the-coach-really-the-answer/
http://freakonomics.com/2012/12/21/is-changing-the-coach-really-the-answer/
Is changing the coach really the answer?
- Thread starter navyrules
- Start date
A
anon_01irjibf16qqj
Guest
Right, so lets just stick with what ISN'T working...
Didn't post to get into an argument, but rather because I found the article to be enlightening. Did you read the article?
Basically, the authors have found through actual data that if you are a "bad team", changing your coach didn’t make a difference. And if you are “not bad,” a new coach usually makes things worse and in many cases considerably worse.
There are two answers. Tell KF to do his job or find some young coach who wants to put in the amount of work a coach needs to do to produce a winning program.
No, but getting the best players on the field is a concern.
Comments like this just scream "Athletic Dept. Message board plant/mole or KF kin" What the hell do you think is working? Our D-Line...nope, our O-Line...nope, our LB's...nope, our DB's...nope, our QB...nope, our playcalling...nope, our clock management...nope, our discipline...nope, our passing game...nope, our running game...maybe, our ST's...yes!!!! OMG that's it, our special teams is working!!! Great success, coach! sign here please
A
anon_01irjibf16qqj
Guest
Recruit better, IMO. I know all about the difficulties of recruiting Iowa, and I know there is a ceiling, but the recruiting has been underwhelming for a number of years. Especially in areas that they like to build off ( lines and running game).
KF has a good name, and I believe can still coach. That said, I'm not sure he has surrounded himself with the best staff, his staff changes are rare, recruiting is usually average at best, no new wrinkles, I think he is loyal to a fault. If he is unable or unwilling to make needed changes then Iowa should look at all options. He showed some flash last year of some changes but we seem to be back to where we were 2 years ago.
I understand Iowa is not going to win every year, few schools are. but we do seem to be stuck at average for some time. Last year was fun, everything had to fall into place for that. The Rose bowl debacle really tainted that year for me. Showing the gap in programs.
I understand Iowa is not going to win every year, few schools are. but we do seem to be stuck at average for some time. Last year was fun, everything had to fall into place for that. The Rose bowl debacle really tainted that year for me. Showing the gap in programs.
tyler thinks that if he posts 500 times about KF needing to be fired, that maybe he actually will. He's either an idiot or has early onset.
A
anon_01irjibf16qqj
Guest
I don't think I have posted more than 10 times about KF being fired...in all of my posts. I invite you to prove me wrong though.
Can you argue what is happening at Iowa is working?
changing coaches isn't happening. It just isn't, unless Kirk retires. There really is no point in talking about it because if it was going to happen, it would have before last season, not now.
The genesis of this post was not to advocate either way for Ferentz's job. Rather to point out that based on empirical data it has been found that:
"for particularly poorly performing teams, coach replacements have little effect on team performance as measured against comparable teams that did not replace their coach. However, for teams with middling records—that is, teams where entry conditions for a new coach appear to be more favorable—replacing the head coach appears to result in worse performance over subsequent years than comparable teams who retained their coach."
You've been posting non-stop, negative Nancy, 4th grade garbage all weekend. We just won 12 games last year! We lose 2 and everyone should be fired. Breaking news, KF isn't getting fired, stop wasting everyone's time. Recruits/players see these threads and comments and realize how some of Iowa's own fans don't have our coaches backs at the slightest turn in outlook. This is when the fan base should have the coaches backs the most, yet here is the board flooded with firing and FU type posts to our coaches. They've spent more time this morning figuring out how to win our next game, then you will all week. As for his contract, he gets paid that much because of how long he has been around, not because of how much he has been winning. Coaches don't get extensions decreasing their salary, it's such a stupid argument. It's pathetic, made more pathetic by the fact that you are doing it anonymously.
A
anon_01irjibf16qqj
Guest
CJ beathard's junior year made KF alot of money. CJ Beathard's senior year will cost CJ alot of money. We are f'd because Gary Barta is gutless and dropped his pants WAY to early and got IOWA right back into the hole we had dug ourselves out of. (Again, why was the extension given when it was? Did you really have 0 sack to hold out until after the season, he still had 4 years left and NOBODY was worried KF would go somewhere else.) We are stuck with KF but put me in the boat that says the program needs an overhaul. Don't you think it's odd that in 18 years you can only name 1 QB (maybe) that got better from year 1 to year 2? The first domino is going to be Barta and that COULD happen after next year. Then it's all about the emphasis the new ad puts on football. The cold hard facts are it's looking like we are going to 4 leaguess of 16 and in th years leading up to this Iowa is going to be about as stale as a program can get. That contract set iowa back about 4-5 years.
we are stuck in the time loop of KF
and will be for a long time
lots of ups and downs to come
and will be for a long time
lots of ups and downs to come
Didn't read the article but according to your summary it sounds like nobody should ever change their head coach. Lifetime contracts for everyone.
I didn't read the article either, but without even looking at the data they used I am highly skeptical of their conclusions. The coaching staff matters A TON in the success of a program. A wisely chosen new staff and fresh philosophy can breathe new life into a program.
Basically look at Illinois and Minnesota over the last 20 years or so.
Illinois
- Beckman/Cubit - 4.25 wins per season
- Zook - 5 wins per season
- Turner - 4.375 wins per season
- Tepper - 5 wins per season
- Kill/Claeys - 6.2 wins per season
- Brewster - 4.25 wins per season
- Mason - 6.4 wins per season
- Wacker - 3.2 wins per season
- Gutekunst - 4.8 wins per season
- Fry - 7.15 wins per season
- Ferentz - 7.47 wins per season
Um, isn't that why you change coaching staff - because you're not satisfied with the state of the program under the current regime, and you want a chance to go out and make an A+ hire? It doesn't take a genius and a statistics PhD to know that good programs tend to stay good, middle of the road programs tend to stay middle of the road and crappy programs tend to stay crappy. Everyone wants to go out and find the next Nick Saban, Urban Meyer, etc. Coaches like that don't come around often, but you're never going to have a chance to find one if you never try.
The data basically shows you that the next guy doesn't do much better than the last guy. Minny and Illinois are prime examples. Minny should have been happy with Mason and the chance to catch lightning in a bottle once in a while and having competitive teams otherwise.
The article don't take into consideration the resources each school has. Iowa has money and lots of it. Iowa has a loyal fanbase. Iowa has top notch facilities.
There are a lot of other factors that would go into deciding whether or not a team has the ability to change coaches.
There are a lot of other factors that would go into deciding whether or not a team has the ability to change coaches.
I don't care what the data says suggesting that the coaching staff makes very little difference in college football is the most retarded argument in the history of retards. The fact that you use Illinois and Minnesota as prime examples of this model is overwhelming proof that it is not valid
Let's look at OSU and UM. Ohio State replaced Cooper with Tressel. UM replaced Carr with RichRod. We know who made the right hire and who didn't. Then UM hired Hoke. Again, not a good hire.
So changing coaches can be good or bad.
So they looked at pro sports with very little relative player turnover compared with college sports, and you conclude that the rule applies to college sports, where coaches have the ability to recruit a fresh set of up to 25 (30 if you're in the SEC) new players EVERY YEAR? C'mon...
We've been playing football for what 100 years and just had the first 12 win season in our history. This coach also had the only undefeated big ten season in Iowa history and the only coach to finish in the top 8 three years in a row. This brings someone on this board to think it's time we try and hire a winner. Thank God the people on here weren't hired as AD.
he is also the only coach in iowa football history to coach in a split B1G conference. it makes it a little easier to win all of your conference games when you arent facing the best in the conference. i also wouldnt consider iowa as undefeated in the B1G last year since they lost to msu.
Just do the right thing and take your $50 million and call it a career. They should be tired of Stoops at Oklahoma by now. Pick him and lets get on with it.
I have thought about this a little and my one fear related to getting rid of Ferentz would be if doing so led to what happened after Tom Davis was run out of town. We don't need a football version of Alford/Lickliter EVER.
Iowa was 8-0 that year but didn't play OSU who shared the B1G title with us and who won the national championship that year.
Sounds more like a Sker fan plant...just hoping for the status quo. Guaranteed most Big10 teams/fans hoping we stick with our guy, and honor that lifetime contract.
Similar threads
